Linked by moondevil on Wed 11th Jul 2012 22:49 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 526588
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To be fair, if you follow Matthew's posts, it's clear that *nobody* remotely complies with the standards.
Indeed.
But only some manufacturers choose to keep private the non-standard-compliant/non disclosed features list. Many choose to publish it somehow in the hope that at least that may allow more people to find their product matching their needs.
Apple is not one of these later.
Worse, in they past they lock their hardware to only allow *their* operating system to run on it, now they lock softwares they don't want to run on their operating system.
I can see a pattern here.
Am I alone?
So, back to topic: either buy a new mac or stop rent your computing experience from Apple. You call.
But you were warning. Since long.
My own impression from reading his blog was that most of current UEFI implementations have very serious bugs, but that no one but Apple has so far completely broken basic functionality such as OS detection ("You can can boot any EFI-compliant OS as long as it's Mac OS X") or the whole notion of boot-time services ("Here, do everything you want with that chunk of RAM, it's free for use after OS boot. The network chip may randomly decide to use it as a buffer from time to time though."). Seems like something done on purpose to me...
Edited 2012-07-13 10:20 UTC




Member since:
2008-08-19
Here are some examples :
http://mjg59.livejournal.com/132477.html
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12037.html
To be fair, if you follow Matthew's posts, it's clear that *nobody* remotely complies with the standards.